InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 194
Posts 16656
Boards Moderated 9
Alias Born 01/29/2018

Re: CSCS post# 68198

Monday, 04/15/2019 8:55:49 PM

Monday, April 15, 2019 8:55:49 PM

Post# of 146249
Sheesh

This stuff again?

No the KERP has not been paid. Here are the requirements for the program:



That is the judge's order authorizing the program, and it means that, in order for the KERP to be paid, the proceeds from the sale had to PAY IN FULL the DIP lender and the secured creditors, over $40M. The proceeds from the liquidation were $4.34M, about 1/10th of the all that debt, so that requirement was not met.

Now, if you'd like an opinion about what the monitor meant by that horribly written sentence, an opinion that is way closer to reality than "they paid off all the debt and didn't tell anybody" that is being forwarded here to sell stock, if you read the program details in the motion by the monitor here:

https://www.pwc.com/ca/en/car/bioamber/assets/bioamber-015_071818.pdf

You'll see that the program was to be paid from the proceeds of the SISP (a substantial figure from a liquidation would do, as well), and it assumed the SISP would provide substantial proceeds to allow the secured debt to be satisfied. The statement is "amounts owing that are subject to the KERP charge," which means the KERP charge is being applied to the proceeds from the sale and, depending on how much was left from the SISP proceeds over and above that which was required to pay the secured debt, they'd calculate the KERP bonuses for the employees within the range that they specified in that motion (there was a range of $480k to $1.3M in that motion), and this would be paid ahead of the unsecured creditors. "Amounts owing that are subject to" means those amounts that the KERP is coming out of, namely the proceeds from the SISP or the second sales process.

Problem is, it didn't work out. The liquidation resulted in only $4.34M, which hardly puts a dent in the secured debt. The KERP bonuses were not paid.

And, again, at the very least, that's way closer than "they paid off over $40M and didn't tell the judge or anybody else." That's just false and misleading.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.